Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from FINHUTC.hut.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0rElYs-00007GC; Tue, 6 Dec 94 00:07 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 0618; Tue, 06 Dec 94 00:07:24 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 0615; Tue, 6 Dec 1994 00:07:24 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4928; Mon, 5 Dec 1994 23:04:07 +0100 Date: Mon, 5 Dec 1994 16:22:10 -0500 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: Some thoughts on Lojban gadri X-To: Lojban List To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: <199411292003.AA17575@nfs1.digex.net> from "bob@GNU.AI.MIT.EDU" at Nov 28, 94 09:10:09 am Content-Length: 1985 Lines: 43 la bab. cusku di'e > Jorge explained his understanding of the Lojban gadri of selma'o LE. > It looks to me that much of what he says is at variance with how > Lojban has been defined hitherto. > > > lo broda At least one of all things that broda. > > Yes, but bear in mind that the {su'o} and {ro} are merely *default* > values. Unless explicitly specified as {su'o} and {ro}, an unadorned > {lo broda} utterance may (but usually does not) imply some other value > for them. No, I think not. If the quantifiers are omitted (or either of them), the default values take over. This is not one of those places where "unspecified means 'glork it from context'"; unspecified quantifiers have the same meaning as if specified to be "su'o" and "ro". > It doesn't say which one(s), but the question > is pertinent and has an answer in principle > (which doesn't mean that the speaker has to know it). > > It is only in this recent thread that anyone has suggested that `which > one' is of any relevance to {le} or {lo} other than as a help in > making translations into English. (Russian is more like Lojban since > it lacks an equivalent of `a' and `the'.) This, plus what follows (elided here) is equivalent to saying that Lojban has no markers for +definite and -definite: there is no telling whether "le mlatu" means "the cat" (+specific +definite) or "a certain cat" (+specific -definite). You have a habit of using "specific" to mean both +specific and +definite, with resulting mental confusion: I urge you to re-read my definitions. In brief: +specific: speaker's intention gives the referent -specific: referent is found by quantifying over the universe +definite: listener can identify the referent -definite: listener cannot identify the referent -- John Cowan sharing account for now e'osai ko sarji la lojban.